Premium
A phylogenetic analysis of sex‐specific evolution of ecological morphology in Liolaemus lizards
Author(s) -
PincheiraDonoso Daniel,
Hodgson David J.,
Stipala Jan,
Tregenza Tom
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
ecological research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.628
H-Index - 68
eISSN - 1440-1703
pISSN - 0912-3814
DOI - 10.1007/s11284-009-0607-4
Subject(s) - biology , adaptive radiation , lizard , sexual dimorphism , ecology , ecomorphology , sexual selection , evolutionary biology , phylogenetic comparative methods , natural selection , phylogenetic tree , diversity (politics) , zoology , selection (genetic algorithm) , habitat , biochemistry , artificial intelligence , gene , computer science , sociology , anthropology
Adaptive radiation theory predicts that phenotypic traits involved in ecological performance evolve in different directions in populations subjected to divergent natural selection, resulting in the evolution of ecological diversity. This idea has largely been supported through comparative studies exploring relationships between ecological preferences and quantitative traits among different species. However, intersexual perspectives are often ignored. Indeed, although it is well established that intersexual competition and sex‐specific parental and reproductive roles may often subject sex‐linked phenotypes to antagonistic selection effects, most ecomorphological research has explored adaptive evolution on a single sex, or on means obtained from both sexes together. The few studies taking sexual differences into account reveal the occurrence of sex‐specific ecomorphs in some clades of lizards, and conclude that the independent contribution of the sexes to the morphological diversity produced by adaptive radiation can be substantial. Here, we investigate whether microhabitat use results in the evolution of sex‐specific ecomorphs across 44 Liolaemus lizard species. We found that microhabitat structure does not predict variation in body size and shape in either of the sexes. Yet, we found that males and females tend to occupy significantly different positions in multivariate morphological spaces, indicating that treating males and females as ecologically and phenotypically equivalent units may lead to incomplete or mistaken estimations of the diversity produced by adaptive evolution.